BALVINDER SINGH Vs. ORIENTAL INSURANCE COMPANY LIMITED

JUDGEMENT

(1.) This appeal under Sec.15 of the Consumer Protection Act, 1986 is directed against the order dated 4.1.2003 in Complaint No.486/2002 by District Consumer Disputes Redressal Forum, Raipur (hereinafter called the 'district Forum' for short) dismissing the complaint of the complainant/appellant.

(2.) The relevant facts not in dispute stated in brief are : that Truck bearing registration No. MP 23d-6051 was insured with the respondent insurer company. This truck was driven by driver Rajesh Kumar Sahu. On 12.4.2001 the said truck met with an accident and got damaged. The complainant/appellant intimated about the accident to the respondent/insurer who appointed Surveyor Sunil Banchhor. The said Surveyor visited the spot on 12.4.2001, and also took photographs of the vehicle. The Surveyor submitted his report dated 26.4.2001. Subsequently, another Surveyor Sheo N. Taori was appointed by the respondent insurer who submitted his report on 12.7.2001 assessing the loss at Rs.35,159/- and value of the salvage to Rs.500/-.

(3.) The complainant averred that though he had intimated about the accident and the report of the Surveyor had also been received, the respondent/insurer did not settle his claim for a long period. Therefore, the complainant/appellant sent notice to the insurer on 3.9.2002. A reply of the said notice was sent by the respondent/insurer on 7.9.2002, in which it was stated by the respondent/insurer that the claim of the complainant/appellant has been disallowed. According to the averment of the complainant he was entitled to get compensation due to damage to the truck, under the said policy issued by the respondent/insurer. It was also averred that the respondent/insurer did not care to settle his claim for a long period and thus committed deficiency in service. It was further averred that even if the respondent/insurer found that the driver did not have proper and effective licence, his claim should have been treated as non-standard one and compensation should have been paid to him accordingly.